Look at how the corporate media LIES to their audeince and think you are all slaves not worthy of the truth but worthy of exploitation and deception.

ONLY YOU THE PEOPLE CAN STOP THIS. DO NOTHING AND CONTINUE TO HAVE THE
WEALTH OF YOUR COUNTRY STOLEN AND YOUR CHILDREN A LIFE OF SERVITUDE.
IF YOU LOVE YOUR CHILDREN YOU MUST STAND UP AND SPEAK OUT

http://www.muckrakerreport.com/id293.html

Washington Post reporter, Dan Eggen, whistles government tune on Osama
bin Laden



August 29, 2006 - In the Monday, August 28, 2006 edition of the
Washington Post appeared an article by Washington Post Staff Writer,
Dan Eggen, titled Bin Laden, Most Wanted For Embassy Bombings? Staff
Writer, Sari Horwitz is listed as having contributed to the report.
In the article, the Washington Post attempts to explain to its readers
why the FBI's Osama bin Laden Ten Most Wanted poster makes no direct
mention to Osama bin Laden being wanted for the events of September
11, 2001. Eggen and Horwitz make no mention whatsoever as to what
prompted them to write this article at this time.



It is clear that the Muckraker Report article, FBI says, "No hard
evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11" has been circulated extensively
since it was published on June 6, 2006. It is also obvious that when
I.N.N. World Report ran a segment on the Muckraker Report article
during its June 7, 2006 newscast after FBI spokesman Rex Tomb
confirmed his quotation in the Muckraker Report article to I.N.N.
World Report News Editor, Claire Brown, awareness of the curious
omission of 9/11 from the FBI's Osama bin Laden Most Wanted poster was
certain to become widespread across the Internet.



The Washington Post makes no reference to the news sources responsible
for its story. Instead Eggen and Horwitz presented their article as
if the topic originated from their own research. They're not alone.
Last week, MSNBC show, Countdown with Keith Olbermann ran a short
segment on the fact that the FBI's Osama bin Laden Most Wanted poster
makes no mention of 9/11. In both instances, the Washington Post and
MSNBC failed to mention that the FBI is on record, confirmed by two
independent news sources, as saying that the reason Osama bin Laden is
not officially wanted by the FBI for 9/11, is because it has "No hard
evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11." However, there is a big
difference between how the Washington Post and Countdown reported this
story. Keith Olbermann accurately implied the absolute absurdity
associated with the fact that Osama bin Laden's Most Wanted poster
didn't mention 9/11, nearly five years after the fact! The Washington
Post on the other hand, engaged in white lie plagiarism while once
again assuming the role of media mockingbird. From a journalistic
standpoint, I.N.N. World Report and the Muckraker Report have done a
better job presenting the facts to the public on this topic than the
Washington Post.



In its article, the Washington Post has resorted to the last line of
defense against independent news sources, such as the Muckraker
Report, that ask probing questions regarding the government's official
version of 9/11. As its last resort, the Washington Post and the rest
of the so-called mainstream media have been reduced to name calling
and labeling as conspiracy theorists, any independent investigative
reporting on 9/11 that challenges the shortcomings of the government's
official version and post 9/11 actions. Why the Washington Post is so
eager to zealously endorse the government version of 9/11 is a
peculiarity worthy of its own investigative report.



While admitting, but discounting as unimportant, the curious omission
of 9/11 from the Osama bin Laden Most Wanted poster, the Washington
Post seems more focused on its attempt to define the 36 to 42 percent
of Americans that question the government's official version of 9/11,
by incorrectly surmising that "The absence has also provided fodder
for conspiracy theorists who think the U.S. government or another
power was behind the September 11 hijackings. From this point of
view, the lack of a Sept. 11 reference suggests that the connection to
al-Qaeda is uncertain.[1]



What's even more disturbing is that the Washington Post reportedly
asked FBI spokesman Rex Tomb to explain why 9/11 wasn't mentioned on
the Osama bin Laden Most Wanted poster, but failed to ask him to
explain his "No hard evidence" quote made on June 6th to the Muckraker
Report and on June 7th to Claire Brown at I.N.N. World Report.
Instead the Washington Post quotes Rex Tomb as saying, "There's no
mystery here. They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because
they don't need to at this point...There is a logic to it." Apparently
Washington Post writers, Eggen and Horwitz, find this acceptable.
Hopefully the readers of the Washington Post will not.

Think about it. Here is a man, Osama bin Laden, supposedly the most
wanted terrorist in the world according to the U.S. government, the
reported mastermind and person responsible for nearly 3000 deaths on
9/11, the justification for the United States launching invasions of
Afghanistan and Iraq; invasions that have resulted in well over
150,000 fatalities, many of the which were civilians, over 2600 U.S.
military fatalities and counting, with no end in sight, 20,000 U.S.
casualties, and hundreds of billions of U.S. tax dollars being shipped
7000 miles away into the Middle East, and the Washington Post is going
to allow the FBI to get off with "There is a logic to it"?

You tell me who the real conspiracy theorists are because this is a
disgrace, a discredit to the profession of journalism, and a real slap
in the face to the American people. Maybe once the Washington Post
and the rest of the media elite get off their mockingbird perches,
they can peck out for the masses, a media bone here - of course only
if the government first approves of the message leaving the nest - and
demand that the government's actions, even remotely, matches its
words. Who gives a damn whether there is logic to it! Based on all
that has happened since September 11, 2001, WANTED FOR 9/11 should be
in red, bold ink all over the Osama bin Laden Most Wanted poster -
PERIOD! Remember, "I want justice...There's an old poster out West,
as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'" G.W. Bush, 9/17/01,
UPI. Sorry President Bush, but no such poster exists. And nobody
within the media elite syndicate seems to care.

Anxious to deflect from the fact that independent news sources have
actually been more aggressive and honest with the public when
reporting about what is actually known and unknown about 9/11, the
Washington Post attempted to dismiss the fact that 9/11 isn't
mentioned on the FBI's Osama bin Laden poster by writing, " Exhaustive
government and independent investigations have concluded otherwise, of
course, and bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders have proudly taken
responsibility for the hijackings." The Washington Post should be
ashamed of itself. When Eggen wrote, "bin Laden and other al-Qaeda
leaders have proudly taken responsibility for the hijackings", he was
clearly referring to what has been dubbed the Osama bin Laden
"confession video". This video was released by the Department of
Defense to the U.S. media on December 13, 2001.



Unfortunately for the readers of the Washington Post, their newspaper
failed to mention the fact that there is no record whatsoever of any
U.S. government official publicly declaring that the U.S. government
had determined that the so-called "confession video" was authentic
before it was released to the U.S. media. To the contrary, independent
media sources have actually done the side-by-side video comparisons of
the "confessing bin Laden" and other confirmed footage of Osama bin
Laden, and the results raise valid questions. The Osama bin Laden
image in the confession video is blurred enough to not be able to
confirm a match with other Osama bin Laden images on record. The
Washington Post reported in December 2001 that the "confession video"
was authentic, but failed to report the names and agencies responsible
for the authenticity process. Sharing this type of information with
the public just makes good sense, particularly since the omission of
such reference feeds speculation. What is so difficult about this is
anybody's guess. The Muckraker Report has been working towards
gaining access to this information - information that the Washington
Post is most likely holding back from its readers.



On August 11, 2006, the Muckraker Report ran an article titled,
Government refuses to authenticate bin Laden "confession video".
This article centered on the fact that the Muckraker Report made a
Freedom of Information Act Request to the FBI in an effort to obtain
documentation that would confirm or deny the authenticity of the
December 13, 2001 Osama bin Laden "confession video". After all,
newspapers like the Washington Post ran articles about the "confession
video" as if it were gospel while the 24-hour news channels played the
video for days - every hour on the hour. With this amount of
exposure, it just seems prudent to confirm with visible proof and
documentation, that somebody in the U.S. government took the time to
verify the authenticity of the tape.



The government response to the Muckraker Report FOIA request: The
material you requested is located in an investigative file which is
exempt from disclosure pursuant to Title 5, United States Code,
Section 552, subsection (b)(7)(A).



It is worrisome enough to live in a country during a time of war, with
arguably, the most secretive and evasive administration ever in our
nation's history at the helm. Having a free press that readily
accepts the government talking points, absent critical skepticism and
investigation, only makes matters worse. If many Americans made up
their minds about Osama bin Laden's involvement in 9/11 as a result of
the December 13, 2001 "confession video", and if the Washington Post
is going to continue to make implied references to the video as it did
in its August 28, 2006 article, shouldn't the people now renew their
demand for the U.S. government to release the original copy of the
video for analysis and determination of authenticity, or is the
authenticity and details of how the confession video was actually
obtained as unimportant as 9/11 not being mentioned on the Osama bin
Laden Most Wanted poster?



It's not fodder Eggen. It's jet fuel.


[1] Washington Post, Bin Laden, Most Wanted For Embassy Bombings?,
August 28, 2006, Dan Eggen, Sari Horwitz,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...700687_pf.html,
[Accessed August 28, 2006]

If you enjoyed this article, please consider donating $1 or more to
the MUCKRAKER REPORT.
Your donations keep the Muckraker Report subscription free!